Fish-eating-a-fish fossil. Photoshopped? April 18, 2010

I had never seen this fossil before. I still haven’t. But I saw a picture of it last month in a presentation and decided to look it up.

No doubt folks all over will say it was photoshopped, rigged in some way, anything but what it is – evidence of sudden and immediate death of the fish doing the eating and the other fish who was no doubt trying to stay alive. Good luck with that exercise in futility, eh?

How is this fossil to be explained? I mean, the fish eating side of the equation must have kept his/her mouth open for a long long time. And the being eaten side had to stay in place, too. Or is there a more reasonable explanation?

And while we’re at it, why are there marine fossils found up on top of mountains?

Oh, and another question. You have heard it said that there is not enough water for a world-wide flood. I learned that if all the mountains fell into the sea and the below sea-level valleys were filled in, there would be enough water to cover the entire planet to 2.7 km high. Hmm…sounds to me like there was enough water for a world-wide flood, no?

And we have forensic evidence of such an event to boot?

Advertisements

Share this:

Like this:

Related

I agree that this suggests sudden death of the fish. But this is not necessarily due to a worldwide flood; it could be due to any sort of local or regional flooding. There are many such events in the geologic record.

But more importantly, the suggestion that this fossil is due to a world-wide flood causes a fatal problem for a YEC doctrine! One fish eating another is carnivorous activity. This would mean that there was carnivorous activity BEFORE the flood. (I thought YECs insisted that there were NO carnivores until after the flood.) Do you REALLY want to claim this fossil to be a result of Noah’s flood?!

In Genesis 1:29 and 30, the bible says that God gave the seed bearing plants throughout the earth and all the fruit trees to mankind for food, and He gave all the green grass and plants to the animals, the birds and to everything that creeps on the earth for food. Why do you draw fish as a logical extension when the passage specifies “on the earth”?

The Bible says that the Flood covered the land and was a judgment to destroy mankind. Man did not spread out widely until after Babel, so the Flood did not need to cover the entire globe. I agree with Hugh Ross that it had to destroy all mankind (a “universal” flood), though my friend Dick Fischer would disagree.

Don’t most YECs claim that all animals were vegetarians until AFTER the Flood, and that this is how Noah was able to collect them and keep them alive on the ark? If you believe that carnovores arose after the Fall, how did Noah feed them and keep them under control on the ark?

I haven’t found the actual article by Woodmorappe/Peczkis, but I’ve read the rebuttal of it by my friend Glenn Morton, which I find fairly convincing.

Sorry, but I have no strong opinion on the location, date or extent of the flood. (Except that I’m convinced by the “facts of nature” — God’s general revelation — that there was no historical flood which covered the entire globe.)

Homo sapiens were almost all over the earth according to the old earth timeline by 10000 b.c., so Kirk, when do you think was the flood? It had to have been before that time, (as you say) so the flood would have killed all humanity (“homo sapiens”) by what you say was a local flood, so where and when was it, Africa, Europe, Middle East?